Your third abortion.....

We're obviously forced to walk that very fine line if we choose to respond to this thread. How easily it can get beyond what it is.

Funny, though, I've seen discussions like this disintigrate a million times before and it some of the stuff said still shocks me.

I'll give it a go.

Mak, you asked how we'd respond to such a law. I'd respond with outrage. I do not see abortion as an ethical evil in its self. I see it akin to any other form of birth control. In fact, I know women that have had an abortion and would do it again because the physical effects of the abortion are easier to deal with than the effects of the birth control pill.

Three times and then sterilized? Why automatically assume that the woman concieving three times will never want kids? My mother had three children before she was 30. She popped out two more afterwards. Three kids? Dead or alive, isn't really that big of a number. It isn't impossible ... in fact it is more common than not if we're talking global numbers. To force that on a woman is to do something absurd because abortion, unlike the birth control pill, has the stigma of an ethical evil.

There is much more to say but if I type too much people won't read.

 

If they did that people would just be going to the Alley-Dumpster Clinic, who's motto is "extraordinary skill with a coat-hanger, since 1937".


I do love that idea though. Use it to pay off the national debt. Hell yeah. Fuck sterilization. Let some of those dumb whores do their part for society for once.


Disclaimer: For anybody like lode who thinks I'm saying abortion is ONLY for dumb whores, calm down. This thread is obviously about certain types of woman who thing abortion is interchangeable with birth control. I've known people to have more that a half-dozen abortions. This thread was an over dramatic way of stating that more women need to be held accountable for their actions in this area of life. I have nothing against an abortion in itself. I have a problem with the abuse of the system that's in place, and I have a problem with the lack of personal accountability that is continually allowed.

Child support, seems to average around $75 per week, per child from my experience. That's 64,000 over 18 years. And more if the child goes to college. If he doesn't pay(learn personal accountability), after so long, he goes to jail.

An abortion is less than $500. Who's being taught personal accountability, and who's not? It takes a woman 128x more "mistakes" than a man to receive the same penalty......wonderful odds, huh?

 

Consider my last post a basic response to this...

I will ask you to quote where I assumed that 'th woman conceiving three times will never want kids". I was speaking from a loss of rights point of view.

In what other aspect of life is it acceptable to make the same mistake, REPEATEDLY and at the expense of another. Whether a fetus is a life or not does not negate that abuse of abortion is a blatant disregard for life in general. I'm not saying the word murder because it's not and that's not my point(just want to make sure that it couldn't be misconstrued and made up as a direct quote by anybody down the road). My point is there is no other facet of life where such blatant disregard for life is demonstrated and not punished.

Misogynistic or not, I stand to want no control over any female or her body. Let her do what she will, but also let her be held accountable the same as everybody else in just about all facets of life. As I mentioned a moment ago, this is a bold exaggeration of my stance, but it is my overall stance if you get me.

 

Who exactly benefits from that? The child still gets no money, and from what I hear, no one has ever learned personal accountability in jail.

 

in california you lose your drivers license

 

I learned accountability in the matter of one breakfast in jail.

Literally.

I looked at the grits they served, which looked like seman, and the burnt, green potatoes, and I realized if I didn't straighten up I'd be eating that shit for a long ass time.

Haven't been to jail since.

I didn't say send the women to jail. I said hold them accountable.

Why does everybody keep changing my words?

 

I didn't change your words. I didn't suggest that you said the women should go to jail.

So I guess what women should do is just not contact the father if she's aborting? Leave him right out of the loop?

If there was ever a law like that passed, you'd see a lot of back alley abortions, which kill women, and a lot of women going to Canada for abortions. It wouldn't stop what has been going on for centuries.

 

ha ha yeah. I thought it was quite a coincidence that you answered my post before you may have read it.

The problem that I have with what you are saying is that you consider actively seeking abortion as a primary means of birth control a form of abuse (of the system, of the practice). I completely disagree.

If you're willing to admit that abortion is not an ethical evil, then there is no reason to see the regular use of it as a form of abuse. If it is not a form of abuse then every woman ought to be entitled to the procedure at her will. And without limit.

 

Search birth control and see how many places recommend abortion as a form of it. Not many, I'm sure.

a·buse Audio Help /v. əˈbyuz; n. əˈbyus/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[v. uh-byooz; n. uh-byoos] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, a·bused, a·bus·ing, noun

1.to use wrongly or improperly; misuse


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abuse

Abortion isn't a recommended form of b.c. because it wasn't intended to be used tht way. Logically, a woman who sees it that way is, in fact, abusing the system that was put in place because that system was not put in place for the same purpose the woman is using it for.

 

So, I do agree that abortion, as a procedure and a concept, in itself, is not an ethical evil.

 

I meant because of 'Captain Abortion' lol.... god people. my name is so thrown aroudn too much.

 

What do you thing of the morning after pill, Mak?

 

I apologize. That really had nothing to do with you. . . .

 

I'm not really sure how I feel about that, to be honest.

Guess I'm kind of fence riding on that one. Call me indecisive. On one hand a pregnancy can technically be aborted by those things, even if only in the earlier stages.

On the other hand it is intended to be used as bc as well, and I've never seen the pills effect as far as under-the-scope type of stuff, but I highly doubt it hits the blood stream, heads to the uterus and starts smashing the egg with a little hammer either.

Just saying... there are basic differences in the two that make me lean towards one over the other, but I'm a firm believer that "accidents" like that shouldn't happen on a regular basis either.

 

Emegency contraception only stops you from getting pregnant, it doesn't stop you from being pregnant if you already are.

 

Don't get me wrong when I say this. I respect you. But that is a weak argument.

Curiosity ...... what was the intended use of abortion, if not to terminate pregnancy? I imagine you're going to say that while the specifics of the procedure haven't really changed, the acceptable reasons for procuring the procedure have. Safety of the woman, pregnancy due to rape .... stuff like that. But the real important part is that abortion, as a procedure, was intended for a very specific reason. That intended reason does not change, even if the reason women seek one does.

The procedure has always been intended to do one very specific thing. The reasons that women seek the procedure may have began as something very specific, but, like any definition, inevitably changed.

 

No, that was a legit argument that cannot be overcome. And I don't mean any disrespect either, but this is one of the few instances where I find you without anything real to fall back on. It would seem this was an attempt to talk around the point.

We've debated intent on a number of different levels in the forums and I'm pretty sure in most instances people say intent matters.

Morphine is made to dope you up. Using morphine to get doped up at 2pm on a Monday because you're bored is abuse, is it not?

These arguments you have would not stand up in any other discussion in any similarly related topic and even in just in general. There's a number of different aspects of the discussion that can be used to show to the lack of consistency here.

Lung transplants started as a way to save lives. They'll do it once for you. You start smoking after a lung transplant and you'll never get a transplant again.

Personal accountability.

 

The fact is that abortion was introduced under the guise of "woman's rights" by eugenicists as a form of population control. People are eager to jump on one side of the issue or the other without really understanding the roots of abortion. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a staunch racist who believed that black genes are inferior to white ones. This is actually the belief among most eugenicists, including the ones who have donated billions of dollars to creating abortion clinics (primarily in inner cities) and normalizing the brutality that is abortion. I am speaking of the super-elite families, like the Rockefellers, who are long-time advocates of population control.

 

It's never the well educated, polished individuals having the abortions or a shitload of kids. It's always these fucking losers who can't afford to even take care of themselves let alone a kid. "I wants me babies so I can collek mo wehfare"

 

Great. But it should still be available to any woman who wants it. Regardless of anyone who thinks otherwise. Im inducting the kindergarten rule of 'keep your hands to yourself'..